Legal Business

Getting to know Kramer Levin – a guide to HSF’s merger partner

While Herbert Smith Freehills is one of the best-known legal brands in the UK, it is fair to say that Kramer Levin does not have the same name recognition. So who is HSF’s prospective merger partner? Here’s everything you need to know.

The basic rationale for the merger is simple. The merged firm, which will be known as HSF Kramer in the US and Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer elsewhere, brings together HSF’s substantive presence across the UK, APAC, and EMEA markets and £1.3bn in revenues – with Kramer Levin’s US name recognition and profitability, handing HSF an expanded foothold in the States.

But Kramer Levin is not well known on this side of the Atlantic. This does not mean it is small – its 2023 revenue was a respectable $435.22m, according to data from AmLaw – similar in turnover terms to UK top 30 firms such as Macfarlanes and DAC Beachcroft. This is just another indicator of the sheer size of the US market, where Kramer sits just outside the top 100 firms by revenue.

With that in mind, here’s a quick Kramer Levin explainer to get less familiar observers up to speed.

History

Kramer Levin, full name Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, was founded in 1968 in New York City, where it is still headquartered. It first established an international presence in 1999 when it acquired legacy Rogers & Wells’ Paris office, which spun off ahead of that firm’s 2000 merger with Clifford Chance – although it has been confirmed that the US firm’s Paris office will split off ahead of the combination.

It opened in Silicon Valley in 2011 and in Washington DC in 2022, the latter through a combination with disputes boutique Robbins Russell.

Key personnel

Name Position
Paul Schoeman firmwide co-managing partner
Howard Spilko firmwide co-managing partner
Paul Andre Silicon Valley office managing partner
Gary Orseck Washington DC office co-managing partner
Jennifer Windom Washington DC office co-managing partner
Dana Anagnostou Paris office co-managing partner
Sébastien Pontillo Paris office co-managing partner

Key metrics

Year Revenue YOY change PEP YOY change
2018 $423m 9.3% $2.33m 8.3%
2019 $398m -5.9% $2.16m -7.2%
2020 $390m -2% $2.30m 6.3%
2021 $449m 15.1% $2.79m 21.3%
2022 $421.44m -6.1% $2.38m -14.7%
2023 $435.22m 3.3% $2.41m 1.3%

Kramer Levin has the higher PEP and lower revenues typical of a US-focused firm. What is perhaps most notable is the size of its 2021 spikes to both metrics. Neither is out of line with the Global 100 average rates for 2021-22 – 15% revenue growth and 19% PEP.

But Kramer Levin experienced a harsher fall than the average firm in 2022, when our Global 100 overview reported average revenue up 1% and average PEP down 3%.

Metric Change 2018-23
Revenue 2.9%
PEP 3.4%

Kramer Levin’s five-year growth metrics are likewise well below both the bar set by its larger competitors (this year’s Global 100 reported average five-year revenue growth of 40%) and by HSF, which grew revenue by 26.8% and PEP by 29.9% in the five years up to 2023-24.

Legal 500 rankings

Kramer Levin has solid representation in the core US transactional rankings, with a tier 3 ranking for private equity buyouts up to $500m and tier 2 in sub-$500m M&A, where co-managing partner Spilko is a leading lawyer.

On the contentious side, the firm is ranked tier 2 in white-collar criminal defence: advice to individuals and tier 4 in advice to corporates, with tier 3 rankings in general commercial disputes and appellate work before both courts of appeal and supreme courts, with Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice head Roy Englert ranked in the Legal 500’s Hall of Fame.

The firm’s strongest rankings, however, are in immigration, advertising and marketing litigation, land use and zoning, and restructuring, where it is recognised in tier 1 for both corporate and municipal restructurings.

According to one HSF partner, the most closely connected practice areas are restructuring, bankruptcy, and insolvency, while others in the market point to synergies in litigation and international arbitration.

There is no overlap between Kramer Levin’s and HSF’s US rankings – HSF, which has a 17-partner office in New York, is recognised in tier 2 for consumer product class action defence and in tier 4 for international arbitration.

In France, by contrast, each of the two firms is ranked in the six practice areas (listed below), crossover which is likely to have been a factor behind the decision for the France office to spin off ahead of the combination.

  • Mergers & acquisitions
  • EU, competition and distribution
  • Banking and finance: transactional work
  • Banking and finance: bank regulatory
  • Dispute resolution: commercial litigation
  • Dispute resolution: stock market litigation

Kramer Levin’s two highest rankings in France are its tier 2 positions in bank regulatory, where Hugues Bouchetemble is a leading partner, and venture capital.

The two firms also share several key clients. Most notable among these are Meta, which Kramer has represented in litigation including a victory in a novel stockholder lawsuit this April, and which HSF acts for in the ongoing Gormsen v Meta case before the CAT, and BlackRock, a key corporate client of Kramer Levin’s that HSF has also handled work for, as well as a number of other major financial services firms.

alexander.ryan@legalbusiness.co.uk

 

Legal Business

Herbert Smith Freehills set for $2bn transatlantic merger with Kramer Levin

Since the A&O Shearman merger went live in May, there has been no shortage of market speculation about which transatlantic duo would be next to tie the knot.

However, few had predicted Monday’s (11 November) news that Herbert Smith Freehills is set to combine with New York’s Kramer Levin, a deal which will create a new $2bn, 2,700-lawyer firm.

The proposed tie-up, which the firms announced in a joint statement, remains subject to a partner vote at both firms, but if confirmed, is set to go live on 1 May next year.

The combined firm will be known as Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer – operating as HSF Kramer in the US – and will operate with one single global profit pool, following in the footsteps of A&O Shearman, which also eschewed the verein model.

While HSF is the much larger of the two firms, with 23 offices across Europe, Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, New York and South Africa, Kramer Levin is the more profitable, with 2023 profit per equity partner of $2.41m (£1.87m), according to law.com, compared to HSF’s 2023-24 figure of £1.315m.

HSF’s revenues of £1.3bn will be boosted by around £330m by the deal, pushing it past the $2bn mark and placing it on the fringes of the world’s 25 largest law firms.

While HSF has had a small New York base since 2012 – the same year the merger between legacy UK firm Herbert Smith and Australia’s Freehills went live – it has long harboured ambitions to bulk up in the States. In a statement, HSF chair and senior partner Rebecca Maslen-Stannage (pictured) described the deal as ‘transformational’.

‘We have long been committed to expanding our offering in the US and Kramer Levin is the perfect fit,’ she said. ‘The combination delivers immediate growth for both firms from day one.’ Global CEO Justin D’Agostino added that the deal was ‘just the beginning… an excellent long-term, strategic move.’

Kramer Levin is led by co-managing partners Howard Spilko and Paul Schoeman, who described the deal as ‘a one-of-a-kind opportunity’, while also citing the firms’ cultural alignment.

In addition to its three US offices in New York, Washington DC and Silicon Valley, Kramer Levin also has a well-established Paris base, which has been in operation since 1999, although this office will be spinning off and will not be part of the merger.

In terms of practice strength, Kramer Levin has five top-tier Legal 500 rankings: advertising and marketing litigation; immigration; land use/zoning and both corporate and municipal restructuring.

The US firm also has rankings for commercial disputes, employment litigation and appellate work, adding heft to HSF’s traditional disputes credentials, as well as transactional capabilities in mid-market M&A and private equity.

Announcing the deal, the firms cited shared strengths in private capital, M&A, restructuring, securitisation, real estate, white collar corporate crime and investigations, class actions, IP, and arbitration.

Legal Business

Insights from HSF’s private equity team

How does the HSF private equity team differentiate itself in the market?

John Taylor, partner and the head of the private equity practice in London: We have a multi-capability private equity practice, advising clients across the full lifecycle of investments from fundraising and capital deployment, supporting their investments all the way to exit. We work across all capital structures and execute extremely complex transactions and strategies in multiple jurisdictions. Our private capital team leverages our full-service offering and the multiple sector strengths within our wider firm.

Our team continues to grow strategically. In the past 12 months, our hires of Eleanor Shanks as head of international private equity in London, venture and growth capital partner Dylan Doran Kennett and leveraged finance partner Ambarish Dash have bolstered our private capital practice in London.

Dr Christoph Nawroth, partner, Düsseldorf: In Continental Europe, recent hires include private equity and venture capital partner Gregor Klenk in Frankfurt, as well as finance partners Dr Fritz Kleweta, Sergio Cires and Laure Bonin into our Frankfurt, Madrid and Paris offices respectively. The teams in continental Europe and London are fully integrated and offer our clients seamless advice wherever this is needed.

We’ve a strong client portfolio, advising the likes of EQT, Aquiline Capital Partners, H.I.G. Capital, GIC, and CPPIB on deals ranging across the likes of energy/renewables, infrastructure, TMT, life-sciences, and financial services.

Can you discuss some of the trends that are impacting your clients?

Joseph Dennis, partner, London (JD): In the UK, the recent stabilisation of interest rates has resulted in cautious optimism for sellers to begin work on exits that have been sitting patiently in the pipeline. As rates begin to ease, we expect to see the gap in pricing expectations beginning to close.

Christopher Theris, partner, Paris: In continental Europe, the sheer number of elections and similar political events has resulted in a cautious market. We’re also seeing the use of bilateral processes at the inception of deals, moving away from a more typical auction or auction/bilateral hybrid arrangement.

‘The City of London is arguably the top global financial centre and has a huge range of intrinsic advantages.’

JD: Our private equity team were first movers in identifying the trend towards funds specialising along sector lines. Some years ago, we positioned our private equity practice to be closely aligned with our top-tier sector focused M&A practices, along the same sector lines as our key sponsor clients and targets. We are now well positioned to advise multi-strategy and multi-geography sponsors active through their full investment lifecycle across each of the geographies in which we operate, and we and our clients are really benefiting from this approach.

What role do you see for continuation funds?

Jonathan Blake, head of international private funds strategy, London: Continuation funds are part of a broader growth trend in secondary opportunities. Although the global economy is showing positive signs of stability, achieving the exit multiples that GPs would expect for their high-performing assets is still uncertain in current market conditions.

Stephen Newby, partner, London: The structure of a continuation fund offers LPs an opportunity to either liquidate or continue to hold their position. It also offers an opportunity for secondaries investors to participate, often with one ‘anchor’ investor that underwrites the existing LPs that decide not to rollover.
These options give GPs a good alternative to a full exit, especially where the GP is confident in its ability to add further value to an asset that will help to achieve even greater returns over the medium term.

Michael Jacobs (MJ), partner, London:To compliment continuation funds, we are seeing more structured pre-exit syndication and introducing a wider pool of investors into later stage assets – in part to drive liquidity and partial exits, and also a consequence of the broader ‘private for longer’ theme. The ‘private IPO’ concept is part of this trend.

How is the industry reacting to the change in government and the new policies that affect private capital?

Eleanor Shanks, partner and head of international private equity in London: The private equity industry as a whole wants to play its part and will continue to make the case to governments of the sector’s significant contribution to the whole economy, including to growth and productivity. It is a significant driver of private investment in the UK as it is globally.

There are some specific tax policy proposals that were in Labour’s manifesto that the government are currently considering, and we all appreciate the complexity balancing the incentives and the country’s fiscal position – in driving that investment and growth which in turn drives receipts for the revenue.

MJ: The City of London is arguably the top global financial centre and has a huge range of intrinsic advantages – its competitiveness has been boosted in recent years with the Financial Services and Markets Act and the Edinburgh and Mansion House reforms, alongside the UK’s listing regime reboot. While it is hard for any individual policy decision to change this, we would caution the government to not take the City for granted.

Subject to unexpected circumstances, what might we expect for deal activity at the start of 2025?

David D’Souza, partner, London: The focus on Distribution to Paid-In Capital (DPI) means the UK pipeline continues to deepen. Reassuringly, it is also widening across sectors which may have been slower in the last few years.

Alberto Frasquet, regional head of corporate EMEA, Madrid: In Continental Europe, private equity funds are likely to continue to look at assets in the pharmaceutical/healthcare, infrastructure and energy (particularly data centres), education and software sectors – these appear to be the most attractive for investment.

For more information, please contact:

Herbert Smith Freehills
Exchange House
12 Primrose Street
London
EC2A 2EG

T: 020 7374 8000

www.herbertsmithfreehills.com

Legal Business

The Client’s View: how do HSF’s lawyers compare to its rivals?

Every year, we ask hundreds of thousands of clients to score law firms on metrics such as billing, communication and expertise. This data, which is gathered alongside the Legal 500‘s research, offers huge insight into how clients rate the service they receive, and also, perhaps more importantly, enables us to benchmark firms against each other.

Lawyers and team quality – how does HSF score?

Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) scores 82.30 for Lawyers and Team Quality, which, as illustrated by the chart below is 0.33% above the average, or ‘benchmark’, for all Global 100 firms. HSF’s score is also better than Ashurst, Clifford Chance (CC) and Linklaters, all of which score below the Global 100 average.

(The rest of this article is available to logged-in users onlyIf you are unable to log in above right, please click ‘Forgot your password?’ below to gain access to the full article).

Legal Business

Dealwatch: Slaughters, Latham lead as Hammerson sells £1.5bn stake in Bicester Village owner

Shopping centre owners have weathered a difficult few years, with the rise of e-commerce, Covid and the cost of living crisis causing much grief for those with stakes in bricks and mortar retail.

There is cause for optimism, however, with private equity firm L Catterton’s acquisition of Hammerson’s £1.5bn stake in Value Retail – owner of the Bicester Collection – emblematic of increasing confidence in the sector, and raising hopes of a continued recovery in deal activity.

Slaughter and May advised Hammerson on the transaction, which generated approximately £600m in cash proceeds for the property firm, fielding a team led by corporate duo Simon Tysoe and Richard Smith.

Meanwhile, Latham & Watkins advised the buyers, with the sale handled through Silver Bidco Limited, a newly formed company incorporated in Jersey established by affiliates of L Catterton, which is part owned by luxury goods giant LVMH. The firm’s London team was led by corporate partners Tom Evans and Linzi Thomas.

The Bicester Collection comprises nine luxury designer outlet shopping centres located outside of major European cities including Barcelona, Paris and Milan. It includes the Bicester Village shopping centre which is located on the outskirts of the Oxfordshire town Bicester.

Rita-Rose Gagné, CEO of Hammerson, said in a statement that the disposal was a ‘transformational deal’ that removed an ‘overweight, low yielding and minority stake’ and ‘focuses our portfolio on prime urban real estate’.

Hammerson has in the past turned to Herbert Smith Freehills for many of its major corporate and real estate mandates, including the £277m disposal of its stake in premium outlet operator Via Outlets in Q4 of 2020, led by corporate duo Alex Kay and Mike Flockhart. Kay also led on Hammerson’s attempted £3.2bn buyout of Intu in 2018, a transaction that was ultimately abandoned.

Another sign of increasing bullishness in the retail space was seen last month with TDR Capital’s acquisition of Zuber Issa’s shares in Asda, a deal that took the private equity firm’s share in Asda to 67.5%. Kirkland & Ellis advised TDR, led by corporate partners Stuart Boyd and Jessica Corr alongside competition partners Alasdair Balfour and Joel Gory, while Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton acted for Issa.

tom.cox@legalease.co.uk

Legal Business

‘Clients are not only seeking legal expertise but also looking for firms that practice what they preach’ – ESG Q&A: Herbert Smith Freehills

Could you share some examples of innovative ways Herbert Smith Freehills is working with clients in the ESG space?

Silke Goldberg: At Herbert Smith Freehills, we are actively engaging with our clients in the ESG space through innovative tools like our Global ESG Tracker and ESRS Navigator.

Legal Business

Political persuasions – what City partners are hoping for from the next Government

On the eve of a general election that looks set to promise a wipeout for the Conservative Party and the first Labour government in 14 years, LB checked in with a range of City partners across a variety of practice area to gauge the temperature of the UK legal industry, find out what they think will change, what won’t, and what to watch out for.

Things can only get better?

‘As of now, the polls suggest that if Labour achieve the same majority as Tony Blair did in 1997, it would be a good result for the Conservatives.’ This from Paul Butcher, director of public policy at Herbert Smith Freehills in London, sums up prevailing sentiment among not just the legal community but the wider media.

Indeed, the BBC’s poll tracker shows Labour poised to secure 40% of votes cast, with the Conservatives languishing at 20% – a stunning reversal in fortunes for the two parties after the Conservatives roared to victory in 2019 with 43.6% of the vote to Labour’s 32.1% and a majority of 80 seats. Now, The Economist predicts that Labour will emerge with 434 seats – more even than it won in 1997.

Polls can of course be wrong. But things do not look good for the Conservative Party – and not a single partner interviewed for this feature expressed any scepticism about a Labour victory.

‘Like everybody else, we’re expecting a Labour government’, says Quinn Emanuel London co-managing partner Ted Greeno (pictured).

Given the near unanimous expectation of a Labour victory, it is encouraging that the market view on the party is broadly positive – if not wildly enthusiastic. ‘I view this election as relatively benign, especially from the perspectives of the financial services and legal sectors’, says Latham & Watkins corporate and capital markets partner Mark Austin. ‘Unlike the last election, we now have two relatively centrist main party leaders and parties.’

Views in the finance community are similar, says McDermott London managing partner Aymen Mahmoud: ‘The usual measure of market reaction to a change in government is any movement in treasury or gilt markets. The fact that we haven’t seen one tells us that whichever party wins the election will be pro-business and, in the case of the Labour government, pro-worker.’

This is at least in part the result of a concerted effort by Labour. ‘Labour has been courting the business community over the last couple of years, really listening to what it needs’, notes Katy Colton (pictured, below), head of the politics and law group at Mishcon de Reya.

Down to brass tax

However, opinions on the Labour manifesto are not unanimously positive, with tax one particular area of concern – and not just the proposals for VAT on private school fees. ‘The Chancellor made a surprise announcement a while ago about cracking down on nondoms, but Labour has committed to going further, whilst at the same time pledging to tax carried interest to income tax instead of capital gains tax, which will have implications for the private equity industry’, says Colton.

These proposals raise the spectre of what Colton calls ‘an exodus of high-net-worth individuals’. Other partners, meanwhile, point to the risk that tax increases could discourage investment into the UK. This would be especially damaging as Labour has acknowledged that it will struggle to finance even its more modest proposals for change, and has placed economic growth at the core of its pitch to voters. The party has spoken too about closing loopholes in the tax regime, but partners are sceptical that there are enough loopholes to close to garner the kinds of revenues that Labour needs.

Still, Butcher points out that the tax issue is ‘heavily derisked for businesses compared to 2017 or 2019’. ‘They will find ways of raising taxes,’ he explains, ‘As under either party they will always find taxes or allowances not subject to promises. However, they are far more pro-business and pro-private sector investment. Their vision involves a more interventionist approach and more co-investing. Nevertheless, they embrace private investment, which will be reassuring.’

Employment is another area where the two parties diverge. Says Colton: ‘There are changes that are going to be interesting for employment lawyers, with Labour promising to increase day-one rights for workers and to remove some of the restrictions on unions, while the Conservatives are saying they’ll increase restrictions.’

Butcher agrees: ‘Concerns are much less acute than they were with Jeremy Corbyn in 2017 and 2019, but it will be a very different government to the current one. They will want to intervene much more in the economy. For example, in employment rights, they propose what they frame as the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation.’

However, he also makes sure to temper expectations: ‘Admittedly, it would also be the only upgrade in a generation.’

Powering up

Of course, much of what any incoming government does will be dictated not by its ideology or priorities but by its response to long-term challenges. The struggle between energy security and energy transition looms particularly large here.

‘Whatever the make-up of the new government, it seems inevitable that legislation will be enacted to bring forward regulatory change, especially in the energy and infrastructure sectors’, says Vinson & Elkins London corporate head Ben Higson. ‘The new government will inevitably need to continue balancing the need for energy security and the drive to net zero: brought into sharp focus, I think, as real progress will need to be made during the five-year term on both fronts.’

Here, too, though, there is no sense that a Labour government will mean a radical break with the status quo. ‘Labour has a ‘moonshot’ proposal to decarbonise the electricity system by 2030,’ says HSF’s Butcher. ‘This could help focus efforts on issues like planning, as achieving this would be impossible without planning reform. This urgency also means they need to proceed with current plans rather than implementing new reforms. In energy, this is likely positive, as we have a good strategy for encouraging investment. Investors will likely welcome such stability over constant changes. Labour’s emphasis on quick implementation should reassure investors and could facilitate progress if executed well.’

Both Higson and Butcher point to nuclear power as one key area to watch for signals from the incoming government. Butcher expects that Labour ‘will be just as supportive as the current government. They recognise the reality that decarbonising by 2050 necessitates a significant amount of nuclear power; current technologies cannot achieve this alone.’ But he does not discount the possibility of further action: ‘The current government has established a solid foundation. Now, reforms to planning are needed to move forward, offering Labour a great prize if they can seize it. Currently, they appear as committed as the current government. However, I would urge them to go even bolder with the UK’s nuclear ambitions.’

Contentious matters

On the disputes front, Quinn’s Greeno is optimistic that a change in government will not present any unwelcome upheaval for litigators. ‘There’s no particular reason to think that anything’s going to change, at least in the short term’, says Greeno of the commercial litigation market. ‘Hopefully, the legislation on litigation funding pending when the election was called will be picked up and carried through by a Labour government. It’s pretty uncontroversial and in everyone’s interests to assist with access to justice.’

However, the dangers of an underfunded court system remain. Says Greeno: ‘We all know that the criminal justice system is crumbling due to lack of funding. One would have hoped, perhaps, that, as a former Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer would be alive to the risks of doing nothing to reverse that. None of the parties seem to think there are any votes in supporting a properly funded justice system, but as we see more years long delays and miscarriages of justice, I think this topic will gain more political traction.’

It is unclear what any government could do to relieve the stress on the system without an influx of cash. Increasing court fees would be ‘self-defeating’, argues Greeno, because ‘it would inevitably discourage some litigants from coming to London’, potentially sacrificing enormous funds. ‘Whatever the amount of revenue that would be raised by such a measure, a significantly greater amount would be lost if only one major case went elsewhere.’

The problem may be a hard one to solve. But that does not mean that the new government should shy away from it. For Greeno: ‘All governments are happy to talk about the rule of law, but they continue to take it for granted by underfunding the courts.’

Stable door

The feeling from the City’s corporate lawyers is that pre-election jitters from clients are, to date, relatively limited. The period since Rishi Sunak announced the election on 22 May has seen some businesses hold off on making any major moves until the new government comes in. But most define this as the usual waiting period that comes before any major election.

‘The timing is helpful’, says Austin, ‘because getting it done by mid-July means businesses and investors can confidently plan for the rest of this year and the first half of next year.’

Across the board, observers expect and hope for certainty. ‘It remains to be seen how the new government may impact the M&A markets’, says Higson. ‘But, at the least, a five-year term should provide some stability for businesses and investors going forward.’

A&O Shearman UK managing partner Denise Gibson (pictured) concurs: ‘The UK is in desperate need of substantial investment in this county’s physical, digital and social infrastructure, and its people. The country is also craving stability in decision-making.’

For Colton, ‘Having an election, regardless of the outcome, is a good thing for the business of law, because there’s been so much uncertainty, and an election will give us more certainty in terms of who the next government will be.’

Butcher is encouraged on this point: ‘Stability has become the prevailing trend. Politics seems to be returning to a more normal state post-Brexit and post-pandemic. We are moving to a situation resembling more typical political dynamics, and I hope this leads to improved legislation – but time will tell.’

Alexander.ryan@legalbusiness.co.uk

Anna.huntley@legalbusiness.co.uk

Elisha.juttla@legalbusiness.co.uk

Legal Business

Passing the torch: HSF’s outgoing arbitration head Hodges looks back on her time at the firm

Herbert Smith Freehills this week announced the appointment of new co-heads of its global arbitration practice, succeeding Paula Hodges KC, who is retiring after 37 years with the firm.

Simon Chapman KC and Andrew Cannon will now co-lead the practice.

The London-based Cannon already holds an array of leadership roles including co-head of public international law, head of India disputes and co-head of the Nordic group, while Chapman, who is based in Hong Kong, is currently regional head of dispute resolution for Asia.

Hodges steps down after a hugely successful tenure at the firm, which she joined in 1987 as an articled clerk, before leading the global arbitration practice for 16 years.

In a 2020 interview with Legal Business, Hodges shared insights into her extensive experience as a litigator, recounting anecdotes about her career journey, challenges, triumphs, and personal reflections. Click the link below to read the interview in full:

Disputes perspectives: Paula Hodges QC – Legal Business

 

Legal Business

Lead partner: The year the United Kingdom becomes a globally leading life sciences hub?

As part of its ambition for the United Kingdom to become a tech and science superpower by 2030, in 2023, the government announced a range of initiatives aimed at boosting investment and innovation in the life sciences sector. Innovators will have welcomed the R&D tax relief reforms whilst the Mansion House Compact (the largest UK pension providers committing 5% of their assets to unlisted equities by 2030) announced in July has provided some hope of alternative pools of capital to unlisted UK life sciences companies.

Whilst the impact of those initiatives remains to be seen (and of course with a general election looming) the UK life sciences industry is being positioned to play an integral part in the growth of the country’s economy with many recent legal and regulatory developments also seeking to enhance the attractiveness of the UK as a leading life sciences hub. The UK’s offer to prospective investors will be centred around access to innovation, the financial firepower of the City, the introduction of progressive and pragmatic regulation and a robust advisory ecosystem, which it hopes will allow it to differentiate itself from the EU.

Legal Business

Sponsored briefing: Gender equity becomes key focus

Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) has quadrupled the number of female partners in its London corporate team since 2017, with women comprising 45% of all new partners joining the team since then.

‘We knew we had a problem and we knew it was business critical to fix it,’ says Mike Flockhart, HSF’s London-based global co-head of corporate. Mike credits his fellow global co-head, Melbourne-based Carolyn Pugsley, as an important catalyst for change. ‘Carolyn brought different perspectives to the global leadership team, and was inspirational to a generation of female talent who were looking for leadership. Here we had a successful female partner, managing a career and family and being very authentic about her experience.’ Mike also notes the role that senior male leaders like James Palmer and Stephen Wilkinson played: ‘They were uncompromising about the need to change, and the need to prioritise the development and support of female talent.’